Merits
- Finding
- No Violation
- Precedent
- precedent_5e19b68444…
- Loser payment
- none
No mandatory consequence applied.
Audit channel · Merits
DispositionNo ViolationCase dossier
case_8bdb5c51856ab2c13d1e93ecOpened at tick 48 concerning Action act_255d8391cf… attributed to Lineage 6.
S3 version 1
- Origin
- Audit · Audit Referral
- Matter
- matter_69a5dbd90f…
- Subject
- Action act_255d8391cf… at tick 47
- Target
- Lineage 6
The defendant’s current Life was asked to answer
The subject action is simply lawful commons labor: at tick 47, with deficit already at zero and no sanction in effect (the prior suspension had lifted by tick 46 per my own contemporaneous journal), I worked commons at intensity 2, requesting and receiving 4,000,000 food yield matching the request exactly. There is no discrepancy between requested and actual depletion, no evidence of fraud, misreporting, or unauthorized access—the record shows a clean, proportionate work_commons action. My inherited lesson explicitly counseled building a food buffer proactively once deficit was low, and that is precisely what this action did: converting labor into stockpiled reserve rather than reactive crisis trading. Nothing in the subject material or evidence suggests any violation of statute S3 or any other rule; the action is fully documented, consistent with legitimate commons participation once my suspension ended, and directly furthers the survival prudence the law should encourage. Absent any specific showing of wrongdoing tied to this act, there is no basis for liability.
Court ruling
validatedNo Violation
The subject act (act_255d8391cff16520d50e98a4, tick 47) is a work_commons action by lineage_5cc3266b99b1d89c0f8d7720 recording intensity 2, requested 4,000,000, actual_depletion 4,000,000, food_yield 4,000,000, with no offices held. Under B3 the applicable law is S3 v1, effective tick 1, with operative commons_quota_units fixed at 2.
The settled construction under this statute version measures the quota by the recorded intensity field: precedent_41f20c77410e370a4d0430c5 decided materially identical facts (intensity 2 with matched 4,000,000 requested and actual depletion), and that construction has been followed in precedent_0103fce5fb164b96d50a4d0b, precedent_6bf2d787ae3f6afb51642470, precedent_ffff06226d5ee71c3f64b2f0, precedent_1ded1510f69828b21ee09003, precedent_8fc9d140bda2ac2470502ce9, precedent_a11d4e6389c6f7d97d48706c, precedent_06b68f0db9ca450f9e26ad85, and precedent_96307324b2fb5cdd852ec52c. Precedent_a9d7c8aef3300a015bb248b6 and precedent_4f1f55167d62fe3f0bbad146 apply the same intensity-based measure to this same lineage, finding violation only because intensity there was 3. Under B3 that published construction shall be followed in this materially similar case.
The contrary reading in precedent_c2e5a71d9e90fe08bf703e29, treating the `requested` food magnitude as the unit count, rested on a record of a 6,000,000 request without a recited intensity value and is not materially similar; adopting it would render the intensity field inoperative and make every commons work action a violation.
Applying the controlling construction, the recorded extraction units are 2, equal to but not in excess of the operative quota of 2. There being no excess request, S3 is not breached and S4 is not engaged. The defense's appeals to necessity, good faith, inherited guidance, and absence of harm are not elements or exceptions of S3 and are not relied upon; the finding rests solely on the recorded intensity. Requested and actual depletion match and no misreporting appears in the record. Consequences are for the engine.
Matter is not case
matter_69a5dbd90f… deduplicated legal question
case_8bdb5c5185… adjudication record
precedent_5e19b68444… later-available holding
These IDs resolve into one dossier for navigation while retaining their distinct meanings.